Adam Schiff Pressured Witness To Change His Story & Accuse Trump

[EatTheRich]

Isn’t that Witness tampering and a Felony?

Sounds to me more like pressing a hostile witness to answer the questions asked.

 

[Jen]

Schiff is toast. Good.

BREAKING: In a secret interview, Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff pressured former U.S. special representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker to testify that Ukrainian officials felt pressured by Trump to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter .

This relates to Kurt Volker’s testimony, which turned out to be a major dud for Schiff and his gang. While Volker, being a former John McCain staffer, was expected to come in and fillet Trump.

It was reported that Schiff got so frustrated with how things were going that he sidelined his MSNBC lawyer to question Volker himself. Now, we know why he did that and we’ve got the transcript to illustrate what happened.


Here’s the rest of the exchange in question, where you can see Schiff continuing to press him to say something he clearly doesn’t think is actually true.

[Schiff] asked Volker whether he would agree that “no President of the United States should ever ask a foreign leader to help intervene in a U.S. election.”

“I agree with that,” said Volker.

“And that would be particularly egregious if it was done in the context of withholding foreign assistance?” Schiff continued.

Volker balked. “We’re getting now into, you know, a conflation of these things that I didn’t think was actually there.”

Schiff wanted Volker to agree that “if it’s inappropriate for a president to seek foreign help in a U.S. election, it would be doubly so if a president was doing that at a time when the United States was withholding military support from the country.”

Again, Volker did not agree. “I can’t really speak to that,” he said. “My understanding of the security assistance issue is — ”

Schiff interrupted. “Why can’t you speak to that, ambassador? You’re a career diplomat. You can understand the enormous leverage that a president would have while withholding military support from an ally at war with Russia. You can understand just how significant that would be, correct?”

Volker tried to go along without actually agreeing. “I can understand that that would be significant,” he said.

Schiff persisted. “And when that suspension of aid became known to that country, to Ukraine, it would be all the more weighty to consider what the president had asked of them, wouldn’t it?”

“So again, congressman, I don’t believe — ” Volker began.

“It’s a pretty straightforward question,” Schiff said.

“But I don’t believe the Ukrainians were aware that the assistance was being held up — ”

“They became aware of it,” Schiff said.

“They became aware later, but I don’t believe they were aware at the time, so there was no leverage implied,” Volker said.

No surprise. The others will threaten, bribe, kill .......everyone to lie for them.

 

[Mick]

You’re being thoroughly ridiculous. Attempting to keep a witness from dodging the question is the polar opposite of making things up.

Dodging what question? Volker did answer it: “They became aware later, but I don’t believe they were aware at the time, so there was no leverage implied."


Volker's answer was consistent. Schitt was trying to pressure Volker to change his answer and lie under oath for him. Volker wasn't playing that game and stuck to the truth. Schitt needs to be behind bars.

 

[Mick]

Sounds to me more like pressing a hostile witness to answer the questions asked.

Only evil men refer to honest witnesses as "hostile".

 

[middleview]

Ha! I knew it! The Ukrainians didn't even know the aid was held up. Why would they?

Trump told the Pentagon and State dept he put a hold on the money Ukraine desperately needed and would have been planning what equipment they would buy, training for troops to use the equipment, licenses to have the gear shipped to them...

Are you really that stupid to think they were not told there was a delay? It was in the news.

 

[middleview]

Schiff is toast. Good.

BREAKING: In a secret interview, Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff pressured former U.S. special representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker to testify that Ukrainian officials felt pressured by Trump to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter .

This relates to Kurt Volker’s testimony, which turned out to be a major dud for Schiff and his gang. While Volker, being a former John McCain staffer, was expected to come in and fillet Trump.

It was reported that Schiff got so frustrated with how things were going that he sidelined his MSNBC lawyer to question Volker himself. Now, we know why he did that and we’ve got the transcript to illustrate what happened.


Here’s the rest of the exchange in question, where you can see Schiff continuing to press him to say something he clearly doesn’t think is actually true.

[Schiff] asked Volker whether he would agree that “no President of the United States should ever ask a foreign leader to help intervene in a U.S. election.”

“I agree with that,” said Volker.

“And that would be particularly egregious if it was done in the context of withholding foreign assistance?” Schiff continued.

Volker balked. “We’re getting now into, you know, a conflation of these things that I didn’t think was actually there.”

Schiff wanted Volker to agree that “if it’s inappropriate for a president to seek foreign help in a U.S. election, it would be doubly so if a president was doing that at a time when the United States was withholding military support from the country.”

Again, Volker did not agree. “I can’t really speak to that,” he said. “My understanding of the security assistance issue is — ”

Schiff interrupted. “Why can’t you speak to that, ambassador? You’re a career diplomat. You can understand the enormous leverage that a president would have while withholding military support from an ally at war with Russia. You can understand just how significant that would be, correct?”

Volker tried to go along without actually agreeing. “I can understand that that would be significant,” he said.

Schiff persisted. “And when that suspension of aid became known to that country, to Ukraine, it would be all the more weighty to consider what the president had asked of them, wouldn’t it?”

“So again, congressman, I don’t believe — ” Volker began.

“It’s a pretty straightforward question,” Schiff said.

“But I don’t believe the Ukrainians were aware that the assistance was being held up — ”

“They became aware of it,” Schiff said.

“They became aware later, but I don’t believe they were aware at the time, so there was no leverage implied,” Volker said.

Where did this cut and paste come from?

 

[Deleted member 21794]

Trump told the Pentagon and State dept he put a hold on the money Ukraine desperately needed and would have been planning what equipment they would buy, training for troops to use the equipment, licenses to have the gear shipped to them...

Are you really that stupid to think they were not told there was a delay? It was in the news.

You have no evidence Ukraine knew. We already know that. No need to belabor the point.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

Sounds to me more like pressing a hostile witness to answer the questions asked.

Hostile witness? I thought it was just a secret hearing by DemocRATS. Would you like to go on record as saying these hearings should be handled as a legal proceeding instead of a kangaroo court?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Schiff was clearly leading the witness but nothing will come of it. It's something to keep in mind when you hear rumors about the testimony of other Trump staffers however.

 

[Nutty Cortez]

Dodging what question? Volker did answer it: “They became aware later, but I don’t believe they were aware at the time, so there was no leverage implied."


Volker's answer was consistent. Schitt was trying to pressure Volker to change his answer and lie under oath for him. Volker wasn't playing that game and stuck to the truth. Schitt needs to be behind bars.

It just wasn't the answer Schiff wanted.

You can all see now why he couldn't make it in the legal world. He's a pasty white doofus.
Another Harvard Grad who couldn't get a job, so got into politics.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Dodging what question? Volker did answer it: “They became aware later, but I don’t believe they were aware at the time, so there was no leverage implied."


Volker's answer was consistent. Schitt was trying to pressure Volker to change his answer and lie under oath for him. Volker wasn't playing that game and stuck to the truth. Schitt needs to be behind bars.

And that answer was the dodge. The question was hypothetical but Volker refused to answer the question that was asked, launching instead into “defend Trump” mode, and assuming contested facts as he did so. His answer was completely unresponsive to the question actually asked, and Schiff pressed him to answer it. Again, that’s the polar opposite of “making stuff up.”

 

[Nutty Cortez]

And that answer was the dodge. The question was hypothetical but Volker refused to answer the question that was asked, launching instead into “defend Trump” mode, and assuming contested facts as he did so. His answer was completely unresponsive to the question actually asked, and Schiff pressed him to answer it. Again, that’s the polar opposite of “making stuff up.”

Uh a Hypothetical IS making something up.

Why answer a question about something that isn't true.

Schiff got punked.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Uh a Hypothetical IS making something up.

Why answer a question about something that isn't true.

Schiff got punked.

Hypothetical questions are well recognized tools to get honest responses from witnesses. Is that why you hate them so?

 

[Deleted member 21794]

Hypothetical questions are well recognized tools to get honest responses from witnesses. Is that why you hate them so?

Sane people prefer reality.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

Hypothetical questions are well recognized tools to get honest responses from witnesses. Is that why you hate them so?

You run away from hypothetical questions.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Sane people prefer reality.

You also oppose hypothetical questions?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

You run away from hypothetical questions.

I see you had a hankering to tell another random lie.

;-)

 

[Nutty Cortez]

Hypothetical questions are well recognized tools to get honest responses from witnesses. Is that why you hate them so?

Under oath, Nope. You stick to the facts- as we all know Schiff can't do.

Schiff tried to trick him and got played for the doofus he is.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

You also oppose hypothetical questions?

I prefer reality when reality is available, as it certainly is here. You prefer la la land when reality is available. In fact, you prefer la la land constantly. You're a DemocRAT. You have no choice.

 

[Deleted member 21794]

I see you had a hankering to tell another random lie.

;-)

No, that's documented fact. But feel free to prove me wrong.